=educated_white_kiwi;3605373]I find it amusing that none of you are willing to argue with someone who knows more about this subject than you do.

Or maybe just claim to? Anyone can come on a message board and claim they are experts in any given area...That doesn't make it true! Most of the unregistered anti's who visit here, insist they are highly educated, with an amazing IQ, and rub shoulders with the academic elite. Of course, we always believe them

Quote:

As I stated in another post, I have much more in common with an intelligent, educated person of another race, than I do with an uneducated, ignorant, red neck with white skin.

You have more in common with an educated person of another race? I thought you claimed in your previous post, that race does not exist biologically. Yet you just used the R word

There is a type of microbe that cannot be classified as either plant or animal. Since this means no clear dividing line exists between the two, plants and animals do not exist.

We say "blue" and "purple", but many hues exist in between. Since there is no clear dividing line between the two, blue and purple do not exist.

We say "night" and "day', but there exists twilight. There's no clear dividing line, night and day do not exist.

We say "men" and "women", but there are people with both sets of genitalia. No clear line, men and women do not exist.

No clear line between hot and cold, no hot, no cold.

No clear line between young and old, fast and slow, tall and short, gay and straight, sick and healthy, music and noise, happy and sad, violent and non-violent, here and there, strong and weak, rigid and flexible, friend and enemy, hard and soft and reality and unreality (the voices are real to the schizophrenics who hear them right?)

I'm starting to wonder if this thread exists

With regard to racial classifications, there are no hard edges. That is race isn't defined in discrete boundaries and never had been either. Racial classification is continuous with a spectrum of characteristics. It is another fallacious rationale of the NO RACE EXISTS crowd to deny race because the topology doesn't match in a discrete manner on the various populations of humans. It's not suppose to.

No no no, none of the other antis are working toward a degree in anthropology. None of the other antis have bragged about how they know so much more than us peons, or gloated about how amusing it is that no one answered them after 48 hrs.

It's been more than 48 hrs. since he received multiple ripostes so I figured he could use a dose of his own medicine.

Homo sapiens simply do not have enough variation to warrant calling different populations subspecies. For subspeciation to occur there must be a barrier to gene flow, which results in reproductive isolation.

That reproductive isolation occured thousands of years ago creating the major divisions we have today. Divions which are instantly recognisable to the naked eye, but which also show up as differences in bone development, muscle fibres, folicle types and other biological differences with the percentage of melanin in the skin only one indicator of race. As an anthropology student you ought to know how different human skulls vary amongst the races.
A subspecies does not have to have major genetic variation but merely show consistant genetic difference that is hereditary. This can be expressed as a physical difference, a behavioural one or both.

The American Anthropological Association and the American Association of Physical Anthropologists both still officially maintain that race is an outmoded social construct. That position is what is taught in anthropology classes and graduate schools in the US.
Here's one statement from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists' Statement on the Biological Aspects of Race:
"There is great genetic diversity within all human populations. Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have ever existed in the past."

The American Anthropological Association and the American Association of Physical Anthropologists both still officially maintain that race is an outmoded social construct. That position is what is taught in anthropology classes and graduate schools in the US.
Here's one statement from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists' Statement on the Biological Aspects of Race:"There is great genetic diversity within all human populations. Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have ever existed in the past."

It's a repetition of the same fallacious rationale that was stated here by educated_white_kiwi. That whole intragroup variation greater than the intergroup variation is misleading and fallacious.

Let me put it this way Men are taller than women on average right?

Well I can use that argument to deny that.

No, there is no differences between men and women because there are more differences within men (tallest man to shortest man) than between men and women ( average male hieght compared to avg. female hieght.

Can you see how stupid that argument is?

Also racial catagories were never defined in discrete manner. The dimensions of the racial catagories of humans are continuous and have a spectrum of characteristics. So that whole business about the topology of the racial catagories doesn't fit with the varieties of human populations is misleading and fallacious.